Now we have pure socialism. Good thing we didn’t get someone softly conservative… Because that would be immoral.

petunia on June 12, 2011 at 2:38 AM

Ok, so your plan is to encourage the republicans to only ever run a candidate one small step right of the Democrats. The choices should only ever be true socialism and socialism-light with no other options.

Anyone who would want to hold the Republicans responsible and work toward actual conservatism that might have true fiscal conservatism take place is a horrible person who wants evil for the world.

We must spend trillions we don’t have, and have both parties do this until we finally go bankrupt as a nation… anyone trying to stop this from happening is evil and awful.

We need to make sure the two parties are both as far left as we can have them, and never let anyone do anything that might push them to the right.

That’s your goal, right? Or did you think your planning and actions here would result in something else?

Would you care to explain how constantly rewarding the liberal/RINO candidates in every election will result in fewer of them? When you reward a behavior, don’t you get more of it?

What happens if I don’t support your goals of pushing the Republicans to the left and opposing either party being fiscally conservative and responsible petunia?

You are not going to ever be welcome among true conservatives again.

Ah yes, for any true conservative knows that we need RINO candidates and that actually having conservative candidates is evil.. or something.

Why do “true conservatives” want to avoid having any conservative candidates and will be horrified that I might want a party that is a bit more conservative than socailism-light again?

I’m afraid even with all your screeds here I haven’t gotten why having neither party being in any way fiscally sane is a good thing. Why do we need bankruptcy within my lifetime?

YOu could have stopped this 14 trillion dollar train wreck instead you wanted purity.

petunia on June 12, 2011 at 2:38 AM

Yes, because under McCain the country would only be $13.8 trillion dollars in debt right now.

But we might not have such a fiscally conservative House if McCain had been elected. In fact, the D’s might still be in charge.

petunia, you spend all your time attacking TP’ers, yet you don’t explain why it’s ok to allow tax and spend Republicans confuse Americans about the benefits of fiscal conservative policies.

You keep trying to make this act work as an argument for Romneycare being conservative, but there’s such a big difference between them that the argument is specious at best.

tom on June 11, 2011 at 1:06 PM

Why do you think mandating people who have the ability to pay for health insurance and don’t, then use free access to healthcare in ER’s, why is that viewpoint conservative?

sheryl on June 11, 2011 at 1:23 PM

I knew I should have watched this page a little bit longer. That’s a fine set of straw men you’ve constructed.

EMTALA had nothing to say about people who have the ability to pay for health insurance and don’t. It simply said that an ER could not refuse to treat someone in an emergency simply because they could not pay.

There was no individual mandate that people purchase anything. The only reason you keep using the word “mandate” is so it will sound more like Romneycare, but that’s just cheap semantics. Technically, every law by nature is a mandate of some kind or another. It’s not the fact of a mandate that’s bad, or all laws would be bad, but the content of that mandate. In Romneycare’s case, the government mandates that every person buy health insurance. Then, of course, it further restricts the kind of health insurance they must buy.

What we wind up with is a government-required, government-restricted, and government-regulated market. It’s bad enough that health insurance will inevitably be government-regulated, and that new restrictions are placed on all health insurers as to what they must insure and what conditions they are not allowed to consider. On top of everything, the government then mandates that every person buy one of the government-approved plans. We effectively then have a state-controlled market in all but name.

Keep pitching, but it’s not selling.

petunia on June 12, 2011 at 2:38 AM

*standing ovation*

Well said.

What are you talking about? We are HERE because of RINOs and their eternal tacking to that mushy middle or loony left while ignoring or trashing the GOP base.

pseudoforce on June 11, 2011 at 11:10 PM

No we are here because you and your think ideological purity gets anyone anywhere in a pluristic society. You get your way or you sabatoge the country in revenge. So instead of McCain we got Obama… you win, your point is made, look at the results of your purity tests!

The right stayed home Obama won and we are know 100 times worse off than under any Republican.

You people are discontents. It doesn’t matter who has power you hate them and blame everyone but yourselves. YOu could have stopped this 14 trillion dollar train wreck instead you wanted purity.

Now we have pure socialism. Good thing we didn’t get someone softly conservative… Because that would be immoral.

I have to ask blink one question: who do you supporting? The country or the tea party?

Pcoop on June 11, 2011 at 6:16 PM

I want what is best for this country. What is best for this country is to make Americans understand that governments need to be fiscally conservative. I’m open to ideas regarding the best way to do this. However, I’m quite sure that it’s wrong to vote in Republicans that keep giving into to the temptation of tax and spend.

The people who are saying that RINOs are the real threat to the country obviously haven’t been paying attention to anything that’s happened since 2009.

Pcoop on June 11, 2011 at 6:16 PM

What are you talking about? We are HERE because of RINOs and their eternal tacking to that mushy middle or loony left while ignoring or trashing the GOP base.

If you don’t like Romney don’t vote for him. I doubt he will win, and if you doubt it too why are you so up in arms? You hate that he is smarter than the others and can think strategically, fine then hate him. But I want the smart strategic thinker over the duds that are the Tea Party candidates.

If you like Obama better than Romney, by all means vote for Obama.

But then shut the hell up. Because if you so much as make a peep of complaint after choosing socialism for all of us. You are not going to ever be welcome among true conservatives again.

You show your true political colors when you vote for socialism.

Class envy belongs in socialism so I am not surprised that is how you fake Tea Party conservatives would vote. You have much more in common with Democrats and your conservatism is fake and plastic and filled with class envy.

I have to ask blink one question: who do you supporting? The country or the tea party? And you can’t tell me “I’m supporting the country by supporting the tea party” because everything I read from you puts the tea party first. And that scares the hell out of me.

How much longer until the tea party becomes that which it rallies against?

I’ve already argued against it

Rod on June 11, 2011 at 2:45 PM

No, you haven’t. You’ve attacked it, but you’ve never made any logical counter-arguments.

pray that, as has been seen here, there are very few thought-police purists

That’s it? That’s your strategy? You’re going to pray? I guess I’m not surprised.

pout

And you wonder why we think you’re being sophomoric.

In other words, you’re unable to argue against their logic.

blink on June 11, 2011 at 2:05 PM

Not true. I’ve already argued against it as have many others.

It’s time to move on – and pray that, as has been seen here, there are very few thought-police purists who will sit home, pout and hand the election to Obama when their perfect candidate doesn’t materialize.

(driving me out?)

sheryl on June 11, 2011 at 2:01 PM

Are you currently in office?

You do know that RINO means someone that isn’t a Republican. It doesn’t mean moderate Republican.

Are you a fiscal con? Do you believe in much smaller deficits and tax rates that don’t stifle economic growth?

Rod on June 11, 2011 at 1:03 PM

In other words, you’re unable to argue against their logic.

I’ve never claimed that I wouldn’t vote for a RINO in the general election, and I don’t necessarily agree with those that claim that this country is better off with Obama would be better than a RINO.

However, they are making their case much better and are much less negative than those attacking them.

That’s the only way to drive RINO’s from office

Yet another message of division, seperation and purity or else coming from TP supporters @ Hot Air!

LOL….um Roy Rogers, that’s not fear mongereing that’s telling you how your message is coming across to a lifelong moderate Republican.

That purity is offensive too me (driving me out?) how do you think that rather rancid message will be in the general?

That’s the problem – RINOs have been discrediting the R brand for decades and I will not support another one. PERIOD.
…
disa on June 11, 2011 at 8:04 AM

Well said.

joe_doufu on June 11, 2011 at 1:35 PM

That’s the only way to drive RINO’s from office, or compel them to do the jobs they were elected to do if they feel pressured.

When they start with the “fear mongering”, driving them from office seems the better option of the two.

That’s the problem – RINOs have been discrediting the R brand for decades and I will not support another one. PERIOD.
…
disa on June 11, 2011 at 8:04 AM

Well said.

You keep trying to make this act work as an argument for Romneycare being conservative, but there’s such a big difference between them that the argument is specious at best.

tom on June 11, 2011 at 1:06 PM

Why do you think mandating people who have the ability to pay for health insurance and don’t, then use free access to healthcare in ER’s, why is that viewpoint conservative?

“‘The EMTALA act simply says that in an emergency, a hospital must treat a patient even if they’re not able to pay.There was no mandate that every individual buy some kind of insurance.”
tom on June 11, 2011 at 2:25 AM”

Exactly there isn’t! There is only a mandate that you be treated (which is a good thing imho) for free, with no demand that you pay for being treated even if you can. Hospitals do recover some of the costs but over 50% of ER visits go unpaid.

There is no mandate that you be treated for free. There is a mandate that you be treated whether you can pay or not. But the hospital can still send you a bill, and still follow up with collection actions.

Yes, some of the costs are never recovered. And some of the charges on a credit card are defaulted on. But no one claims that credit cards are therefore free.

You keep trying to make this act work as an argument for Romneycare being conservative, but there’s such a big difference between them that the argument is specious at best.

Anyone with a “R” is better than Zero. People that can’t see that are fools.

FireBlogger on June 10, 2011 at 11:17 PM

People that disagree with you have outlined their logic. Do you care to address their logic in any meaningful way?

blink on June 11, 2011 at 12:43 PM

Well, I never thought it would happen but I have to say I agree with you blink.

It probably would have been better if FireBlogger had said:

“I have read all the illogical comments that the so-called pursuits have posted here in their lame attempt to support their self-centered and myopic viewpoint and have concluded that they are all fools.”

That’s much better, don’t you think? Much more meaningful.

Anyone with a “R” is better than Zero. People that can’t see that are fools.

FireBlogger on June 10, 2011 at 11:17 PM

People that disagree with you have outlined their logic. Do you care to address their logic in any meaningful way?

Hey that’s me. I identify with the Tea Party and I like Romney just fine. I think he is very conservative.

petunia on June 10, 2011 at 11:08 PM

I think this is a much better argument to people like HondaV65. You’re better off trying to convince him that Romney’s not a RINO, than convincing him that he’s selling out his country if he doesn’t vote for a RINO candidate in the general.

But I don’t think I will go to hell for voting for him. That is the difference. That is what makes him not “conservative”

This paragraph isn’t coherent.

The Tea Party is trying to wrangle power from the Republicans.

sheryl on June 10, 2011 at 9:54 PM

Correction. The Tea Party has, quite clearly, already wrangled power from the Republican Party.

You are free to deny that if you want, but you’d be wrong.

You can complain about them all day long if you want, but they are a reality that you need to deal with. Stop stupidly pretending that their influence doesn’t exist simply because you don’t like their beliefs.